for example how long in the past does something need to have happened before it's considered "history"? Just last week one of my neighbors was hit by a car, but a few days later it came out in the newspaper under the current events section. what gives? are these newspaper fatcats just persumptuious or does it really take a certain amount of time of analyzing something before it can be classified as history?

Anything in the past could be considered history. The revolutions occuring in Libya, Egypt and Tunisia are historical events that are happening today. Whenever someone uses the phrase "History is being made today", they are implying the event is signifigant enough to be analyzed and discussed in the future.

Which is sort of meaningless really, as historians today analyze just about everything from the past, from the type of food eaten, to daily schedules of regular people, etc.

Kind of. There's an old adage, a 3 day old newspaper is boring, a 3 year old newspaper is interesting.

History lends itself to branching that's akin to the branching in economics, 'microhistory' and 'macrohistory', I guess.

I don't know how much time has to pass before something is technically history and something is technically current events.

A lot of things that happen continue to cause other events to happen for a while after the first event occurred and sometimes society only notices the big major headline things and misses the little things that led to them. So maybe little things aren't so little.

The types of foods eaten, daily schedules etc are pertinent to history in some respects. There is a new tv show in the UK called Seven Ages of Britain.
The first episode tells how man lived and survived and evolved up to 8000 yrs ago when Britain was seperated from mainland europe. It explains how they managed to adapt to the changing enviroment by changing their eating habits, religious beliefs, social interaction etc. It explains the need for changing hunting techniques to adapt to the drastically changing landscape and how weapons were developed or how they would get vital nutrients from plants that the human body needs to survive. What type of shelters were developed in different areas, trade, ways to protect their young... all sorts of things are pertinent to history and are far from meaningless.
It's an interesting and fascinating series and is presented by Bettany Hughes who is hot! http://www.channel4.com/history/micr...sevenages.html

Popular histories, social histories, and "micro" histories have gained in popularity significantly in the last 50 years, and thus what constitutes a valid object of historical study has greatly expanded.

I did 'Roman Studies' at school, which was essentially microhistory of Romans - households, gladiator training, legion training and operations, that kind of thing. It was a terrific subject.

It went hand in hand with Latin, which was okay. It freaks people out sometimes if I translate Latin expressions on coats of arms etc. I remember being proud of myself for inventing the motto of a womaniser: 'vidi, vici, veni'.

So, was Spartacus: Blood and Sand really accurate? Because somewhere in the middle they said "we can't help having all this adult content, we need to keep it realistic." And that has to be ********, right?

I've not seen Spartacus, but it was a pretty racey life. They were the rockstars of their day, despite being slaves, and rich women would pay for their 'company'

Okay, but how about naked slave girls sitting around in pools in the courtyard as decorations?

I remember being proud of 'Vici - Veni - VD'. Though I'm sure it was done before.

Can you recommend anything I could get that might help with learning basic Latin? I've been interested in that for a while.

Good one. Personal experience, I'll bet. I found Latin easy, but have never really used it, and can barely recall anything. A few verb conjugations, I took it because I wanted to know a dead language. Should've studied French. England used french for documents, among the upper classes, and within the intelligentsia, for some period, I think. Must be good reading there.

Why do you want to study Latin? Read Roman history in the original? Not to mention the Catholic Church. What I would give for access to those archives. Pity the Library of Alexandria's already ashes. Now that, would be interesting reading.

Partly that, partly because of an amateur interest in etymology which I think it would help with, and partly because I feel like I'm just not quite alienated enough from the common man at present.
I understand that's widely considered a myth.

Etymology's an interesting study, all by itself. I love words, but am more interested in nuance than origin. Thank heaven for alienation. It's the one thing I do like about you. Granted I don't qualify as common man. Can't change your status. Sorry about that.

The burning of the Library? That was another propaganda ploy? It never really burned? Cite your sources.

He is a Christian, but this guy seems to know his stuff:
Now that paragraph is out of context; he's talking about one particular version of the myth. Nevertheless the sheer abundance of such rival versions is itself a hint to the probable mythic nature of the story.

I gave up about ten lines in. Somehow, I suspect that isn't surprising to you.

It had to be rediculous, too much verifiable evidence in written history. But with all the factual history, now becoming at best theoretical, and most likely outright bull****, I'm having a crisis. Another treasured tradition disputed and I'll become downright melodramatic.

Lemme see, lemme see, uh, (educated) people in the Middle Ages didn't think the Earth was flat, there was never any culture in the US of appending 'No Irish Need Apply' or similar to job notices, and the Wild West was surprisingly tame. That should push you over the edge.

Nope. Gotta do better. Educated people were indicted by the inquisition, for declaring the world was round. In particular Galileo Galilei, who, under threat by the grand inquisitor, of being declared a heretic, recanted, and swore the earth was flat.

Who on earth cares about the Irish? (and, I'm one quarter Irish myself). My father's mother was from Ireland. Otherwise, English and German. I guess you could say I'm a mutt. And I've never been discriminated against cause of me brogue. I also do not riverdance, and cannot sing ethereally. Is there anything else about the irish, that's interesting? Oh..forgot about you for a minute. Nice try.

The wild west is another shameful part of American history. Who, but our arrogant asses, would take pride, in a period, of criminals, con-artist, grifters, and thieves? (And did I mention, saloon girls, and harlots?) I know you're more familiar with those... At least I hope so.

Wow. That is so not what happened. It was heliocentrism (also, Galileo kind of went looking for trouble, which I respect, but you can't say he didn't know what he was doing). Aristotle laid out three arguments against the flat earth hypothesis - disappearing stars as you travel south, ships disappearing from the hull up as they approach the horizon and, most damningly, the fact that the Earth's shadow on the moon is always perfectly curved. Then some time later Eratosthenes not only figured out that it's round, he measured its circumference to an impressive level of accuracy. Seriously, educated people have known since then that it's round. People did not laugh at Columbus for thinking the world was round, they laughed at him for thinking it was shaped like a pear and about 2/3 its actual size. And they were right to laugh at him.

Literally everyone. Culturally we punch way above our weight, demographic-wise. I just wish I was dumb enough to be proud of that fact. Or at least ignorant enough not to realise it's entirely the result of having been conquered by the English.

Who else but mostly every other culture ever? I mean what do you think Robin Hood was, a law-abiding citizen? And he never existed either... Seriously, though, if you do indeed find etymology interesting, I recommend you look into the history of the word 'villain' and compare and contrast with the history of the word 'cowboy'. There's very little new under the sun.

Saloon girls and harlots are indeed my stock in trade, naturally. They don't mind at all when I contradict their misperceptions.

I could say I'm astonished, but that wouldn't really come close. I saw this particular piece of history with a certains sense of dizziness. We knew the world was round in the, Third, century BC? I am impressed. That's only about nineteen hundred years away from my acquired information. I'm coming to the conclusion, I didn't have that great of an education. It forces me to reevaluate from an entirely new paradigm, the accuracy, or lack thereof of all the eminently believable facts, I've learned before. How is it possible, within the framework of a university education, to get something so obviously wrong? Or maybe I didn't learn of it at school. Maybe I read it in a book, or picked it up in conversation, regardless, I did do some minimal research on the subject, just to get my facts straight, for something I wrote. There was no indication it was fallacious. The year, 297 BC, is significantly more impressive than 1600 AD. What happenned between then and 1600 AD? I feel the metal gears inside my head, shifting to ecompass this new knowledge.

Why on earth, would the Roman Catholics. prosecute Gallileo for heresy, if he's only confirming what was already known? Was it lost information? Tell me more about this story. I can add it to my post on Greece.

I think the irish are charming people. I was merely giving you a hard time, which you've returned with interest. I can understand your delimma. Here in the US, every third song is of Irish origin. It's because of the ethereal esthetic quality, and sing-song accent. It's hard to resist it's soothing, lullaby lilt. And then there's U2! Irish films have been big recently too, mostly about the conflict. But I don't think you really care whether their exportation profits are up. How does the ancient enmity, between Ireland and England effect your life? Does it bother you personally that England conquered Ireland? Do you feel conquered? I imagine it's the most magical and beautiful place on earth. Even commercials catch my eye and I can't look away.

I find the cowboy west distasteful. It isn't a pleasant place to fantasize about. Robinhood was an aristocratic criminal, more cultured and beneficient in concept and practice, with empathetic and idealistic proclivities. (who might have existed)Not some dirty saloon-keeper, swilling rot-gut and shooting wild horses. There isn't one thing about the west I find the least bit desirable.. In fact, it's deplorable. In conditions, in standards, in every imaginable manner..

I'll never admit it in public, but truth be told, I simply adore being corrected, when I must, actually concede, I'm wrong. There are few things more intrigueing than, freshly acquired information. I's the gestalt aspect. The sudden synthesis and practical compounding of all previous knowledge into one concomitant, synergistic, whole. The Aha, or Eureka, syndrome. But certain implications could be discomfiting. Please correct this misrepresentation at your earliest convienance.

They didn't persecute him for saying it was round, they persecuted him for agreeing with Copernicus that it orbited the sun, rather than vice versa.

And it wouldn't surprise me at all if you learned it in school; I did. I even remember the little song we learned as kids: Mister/Christo/-pher Columbus/Sailed the sea without a compass...

Until you see our teeth. It's all downhill from there.

Ireland be proud. Produced the greatest poet ever and one of the most dominant NBA centers of all time.

It's made every year.

Is anybody not Irish these days?